Was Bessler for real?

[johnny874]

I am not up on all the gravity stuff that is being tried, and well I probably never will be but I have not heard of any person making a very simple observation about mass falling under the influence of gravity, never making the observation that even when the mass is moving up it is applying a force down that can be used while you are lifting the mass back up, pulling it up by it's own bootstraps if you will.

Lets say you have a chain loop running over a sprocket, on this chain you hang a mass, as gravity pulls down on the mass it also pulls the chain turning the sprocket, now if you have a lifting device on the mass which reaches up the chain and grabs hold and lifts the mass back up you have allowed for two things to happen, first is that the input value from the mass is continuous, no stop in applied force, and second you have opened the system up to allow for an outside force to enter the system.  So the lifting mechanism is something like a spring loaded arm that is stretched up and the spring pulls the mass up, the force the spring needs to apply is the same force that the mass gives while it is falling, an even trade but the mass is still pulling and falling while you are lifting it back up, maybe something extra can be had there?

If this has been talked about then excuse my interuption and ignorance.

Tom Webb

  Hi Tom,
Could you post a drawing ? I think it would help to understand what your thinking a little better.
You know, in Besslerwheel, someone actaully took the time to build something similar to what I think you are describing. What surprised me was when someone who hadn't built criticized it, he quit discussing his work.
There actually might be a way to use a secondary system to allow a chain lift to work. If I understand correctly, the weights dropping need to act as a whole, seperate from the rest of the system while still being the motive force.
What the undeserved criticism was is this, that the basic premise of the math will show all things to be equal and they will. The argument against perpetual motion is that if a weight drops one meter, it can only lift another weight one meter. This is all that needs to happen.
What I understood by considering math is that if 1/2 of the weights move 1/3 the distance, then the other 1/2 of the weights will move 2/3's the distance.
Where extra energy is gained is the point above and below the 1/2 that is the motive force.
The weights on the left and right side would cancel each other out. This means that about 1/4 of the weights would actually be creating resistence. And 1/4 is less than 1/2.
The orange weights would be the motive force. If you notice, there 7 of them and 5 on the other side of the chain. all the other weights would cancel themselves out. It would need a secondary system that supports the 7 weights and then drives the primary chain belt.

                                                                         Jim
                                                                           
edited to add; Tom, the journey's end can be much better. This is what has kept me motivated and it is why I build.

[AB Hammer]

  Alan,
>> But now your change needs a roller on the short end to lessen the friction. But a good change <<

Read what I posted. I said it did.

>> What little early friendship died a long time ago when you couldn't follow reasoning and got nasty on Bessler wheel forum. <<

I think when you post I am the ultimate fraud would show I was never your friend.
http://besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4656

and someone posted this thread. Doubt it was your wife Alan.
>> There are few individuals that get me irate on this site when they abuse my husband's intelligence for those people your not allow to do that, only I am, it is in my marriage contract so unless you want to marry my hubby back off. << 

   I mean really, you will openly call someone who has openly built a fraud.
Using staionary arms;
(http://i979.photobucket.com/albums/ae278/bessler_supporter/Picture0121.jpg)
Using moveable levers/arms
(http://i979.photobucket.com/albums/ae278/bessler_supporter/23levers.gif)
Bessler's clue of the child's toy
http://www.besslerwheel.com/wiki/index.php?title=Image:Mt_138-141.gif
(http://i979.photobucket.com/albums/ae278/bessler_supporter/Mt24mod1.jpg)


As you just mentioned, a real builder would put a roller at the end of the lever.
What I posted, lines 6 & 7.
>> The short lever or scissor would have a pulley at the end of it. This would allow it
to roll on the back side of a warped board. <<
I think this is why I do not like you.
Be it as it may Alan, I have never seen you build anything. NEVER.
Yet you criticize my efforts because openly building gives me something to talk about with other people. And as you told me and whorton both, you will build our ideas, but you will also show they won't work. You always have that caveat in it for yourself.
Don't need your help Alan as you do not recognize my education and work experience.

                                                                           Jim

edited to add; Alan, when I was being treated for cancer, you would not allow me to discuss the build I was working on. Why we will never be friends.

Jim

Do you have a problem telling the difference between a roller and a pulley?

A roller is more of a wheel with no rims.

A pulley is with rim like sides to allow a rope in place, but can be used as a track roller. But having your arms fall from the device to pump it could cause it to catch on the edge and give you trouble. This is my point of only a roller. Your drawing didn't show either. 

The fraud string is of how you play on forums in a fraudulent fashion. Your actions earned you this title as you are starting to show again. Please stop the lies and play nice.


To all


Now the Fraud strings was posted. Please read it through so you can see for yourselves. But note how many names Jim has posted under and the links I posted of his different names. The evidence is clear. Case closed. Jim was banned again, and again, and again, ....


Also Jim said I was posting as my wife. FDROLMAO  I treasure my nuts. My wife speaks for herself.


What Jim said that I highlighted in red is a big Lie. But he wants me to post more everything I have done, and He is the biggest reason I don't. As much as he attacks me I wonder if he is getting paid to antagonize.  Or it is just his obsession to try to destroy my name if at all possible, IMO.


PS It is simple Jim. Don't use my name and I will never post directly to you. Is this so hard for you to understand. It sure seems so. So what are we come up on now? 3 years plus of dealing with your slander.

[johnny874]

I have attached a bad drawing of what I am talking about.

So we have 2 sprockets, one up and the other down, we have a scissor lift mechanism that is spring loaded so that it has just enough force to lift the mass and finally we have the mass.

When the mass has fallen to a predetermined point the scissor lift mechanism is operated lifting its end up above the start point of the mass holding onto the chain and lifting the mass back up.

I understand that this system as described is a net zero system, meaning that the force to lift still equals the force from the fall but what I am allowing for is the introduction of an outside force that the system may be able to amplify, a constant force being applied to the chain and a means to allow for different rates of applied force.

For some reason when I see some of the drawings of Bessler's device I do not see a Gravity wheel per say, but rather a gravity powered mechanical amplifier, so I think that a small force is being added to the system at the appropriate time and the system is adding that input to the force of gravity changing the static start conditions of the system and maybe allowing for a change of velocity during certain phases of operation and that higher rate of applied force is where the gain comes from.

One of the things that popped out when viewing it as an amplifier is that the mass should not be pulled up the other side, when the mass is moving up the other side it is a total loss to the system but when you have itself lifted up by the chain it is still a loss but at the same time the loss is occurring the mass is still applying a positive force into the system.

   Hi Tom,
Just going off the top of my head here, but if you had a swinging pendulum, then you would have an efficient force that could be recgarged to keep your wheel spinning.
What I'm thinking is the pendulum could lift your scissors which lifts your weight. And when the weight's allowed to drop again, it creates more force. The difference between a straight line and a curve. Or simply put, when you close one scissor, they all close. This would use less energy lifting the weight than the energy being generated when the weight drops  causing your wheel to spin.
Like I said, just a quick thought but what you're showing is something new I believe. But I like it.

                                                                       Jim

edited to add; Tom etal, this link is for how grandfather clocks work. They are not as simple as some would believe. And in knowing that Bessler built them would help to demonstrate some of his knowledge.
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/gadgets/clocks-watches/clock.htm

[AB Hammer]

I have attached a bad drawing of what I am talking about.

So we have 2 sprockets, one up and the other down, we have a scissor lift mechanism that is spring loaded so that it has just enough force to lift the mass and finally we have the mass.

When the mass has fallen to a predetermined point the scissor lift mechanism is operated lifting its end up above the start point of the mass holding onto the chain and lifting the mass back up.

I understand that this system as described is a net zero system, meaning that the force to lift still equals the force from the fall but what I am allowing for is the introduction of an outside force that the system may be able to amplify, a constant force being applied to the chain and a means to allow for different rates of applied force.

For some reason when I see some of the drawings of Bessler's device I do not see a Gravity wheel per say, but rather a gravity powered mechanical amplifier, so I think that a small force is being added to the system at the appropriate time and the system is adding that input to the force of gravity changing the static start conditions of the system and maybe allowing for a change of velocity during certain phases of operation and that higher rate of applied force is where the gain comes from.

One of the things that popped out when viewing it as an amplifier is that the mass should not be pulled up the other side, when the mass is moving up the other side it is a total loss to the system but when you have itself lifted up by the chain it is still a loss but at the same time the loss is occurring the mass is still applying a positive force into the system.

I will look up some of my videos where I tested for another member where a weight and a spring was use. This should help you out to see what action you most likely will get. Resiting springs tend to be problematic. But what you have posted need something else to be evaluated correctly.  I will send you some links in private messages for these test in a few days.

Alan

[johnny874]

   Alan,
Why don't you just post the videos ? Maybe someone might spot something you're missing.
Just a thought you know, this being an open forum and all.

                                                                            Jim